and to the Christian reader for the exercise of charity. "Pray for me that these tears may procure
me the compassion of the Almighty."
His doctrine was misrepresented by Lanfranc and the older historians, as denying the real
presence.^736 But since the discovery of the sources it is admitted also by Roman Catholics that,
while he emphatically rejected transubstantiation, he held to a spiritual real presence and participation
of Christ in the eucharist.
This explains also the conduct of Gregory VII., which is all the more remarkable, as he was
in every other respect the most strenuous champion of the Roman church and the papal power. This
great pope was more an ecclesiastic than a theologian. He was willing to allow a certain freedom
on the mysterious mode of the eucharistic presence and the precise nature of the change in the
elements, which at that time had not yet been authoritatively defined as a change of substance. He
therefore protected Berengar, with diplomatic caution, as long and as far as he could without
endangering his great reforms and incurring himself the suspicion of heresy.^737 The latest known
writing of Berengar is a letter on the death of Gregory (1085), in which he speaks of the pope with
regard, expresses a conviction of his salvation, and excuses his conduct towards himself.
Berengar was a strange compound of moral courage and physical cowardice. Had he died
a martyr, his doctrine would have gained strength; but by his repeated recantations he injured his
own cause and promoted the victory of transubstantiation.
Notes. Hildebrand and Berengar.
Sudendorf’s Berengarius Turonensis (1850) is, next to the discovery and publication of
Berengar’s De Sacra Coena (1834), the most important contribution to the literature on this chapter.^738
Dr. Sudendorf does not enter into the eucharistic controversy, and refers to the account of Stäudlin
and Neander as sufficient; but he gives 1) a complete chronological list of the Berengar literature,
including all the notices by friends and foes (p. 7–68); 2) an account of Gaufried Martell, Count of
Anjou, stepfather of the then-ruling Empress Agnes of Germany, and the most zealous and powerful
protector of Berengar (p. 69–87); and 3) twenty-two letters bearing on Berengar, with notes (p.
88–233). These letters were here published for the first time from manuscripts of the royal library
at Hanover, contained in a folio volume entitled: "Codex epistolaris Imperatorum, Regum,
Pontificum, Episcoporum." They throw no new light on the eucharistic doctrine of Berengar; but
three of them give us interesting information on his relation to Hildebrand.
- A letter of Count Gaufried of Anjou (d. 1060) to Cardinal Hildebrand, written in March,
1059, shortly before the Lateran Synod (April, 1059), which condemned Berengar (p. 128 and 215).
The Count calls here, with surprising boldness and confidence, on the mighty Cardinal to protect
Berengar at the approaching Synod of Rome, under the impression that he thoroughly agreed with
him, and had concealed his real opinion at Tours. He begins thus: "To the venerable son of the
church of the Romans, H.[ildebrand]. Count Gauf. Bear thyself not unworthy of so great a mother.
reported to have repeated his creed before one of the two Synods which were held at Bordeaux in 1079 and 1080, but of these
we have only fragmentary accounts. See Mansi, XX. 527; Hefele, V. 142 sq.; Sudendorf, p. 196.(^736) He was treated as a heretic not only by Roman Catholics, but also by Luther and several Lutheran historians, including
Guericke.
(^737) His enemies of the party of Henry IV. charged him with skepticism or infidelity on account of his sympathy with
Berengar. See the quotations in Gieseler, II. 172.
(^738) I obtained a copy by the kindness of Professor Thayer from the library of Harvard College, after hunting for one in
vain in the libraries of New York, and the Niedner library in Andover (which has B.’s D. S. Coena, but not Sudendorf’s B. T.).